A long-simmering legal battle between a Florida luxury dealership and one of the world’s most powerful automakers is finally heading toward a courtroom showdown.
The Collection, the Coral Gables-based dealership group that sells Porsche along with eight other premium brands, has been fighting Porsche AG and two of its affiliates for more than three years. On Oct. 23, Circuit Judge Lisa Walsh of Miami-Dade County’s 11th Judicial Circuit again rejected a motion from Porsche AG, Porsche Cars North America, and Porsche Latin America to dismiss the case. That means, for the second time, she’s ruled that Florida’s state court has proper jurisdiction — and that this high-stakes dispute will stay in her courtroom for now.
Porsche quickly filed a notice of appeal to the 3rd District Court of Appeal on Oct. 31, but The Collection’s attorney, Sean Burstyn, said he still expects the case to move forward to a jury trial in March.
At the heart of the suit is The Collection’s claim that Porsche retaliated against the dealership for refusing to build an exclusive Porsche-only store. According to the complaint, Porsche slashed the dealer’s allocation of “pool cars” — discretionary inventory such as test vehicles and high-demand models — after The Collection declined to break away from its multi-brand location. The dealership argues that the automaker’s actions violate Florida’s Dealer Protection Act and amount to a civil conspiracy to choke off supply.
Burstyn said Porsche’s demand stood out because none of the other luxury automakers at The Collection — brands that share space under one roof in the heart of Coral Gables — have ever asked the group to build separate stores. “They are all thrilled to operate out of a multi-brand facility,” he said. “We’ve proven you can represent multiple brands under one roof.”
The complaint seeks an injunction to prevent Porsche from restricting inventory allocations, plus $100 million in compensatory damages for lost profits. Under Florida law, any damages awarded in this type of case would be automatically tripled, potentially raising Porsche’s exposure to $300 million.
Court records and filings show The Collection was once one of Porsche’s top-performing U.S. dealerships, ranking near the top of national sales lists before allocations were reduced. The dealership’s lawyers say its ranking fell sharply after 2019, and that Porsche’s restrictions directly caused the downturn. Porsche’s position is that its pool car allocations are discretionary and that the company has the right to manage supply according to brand strategy and facility commitments.
For now, the case will stay in Miami-Dade County, thanks to Judge Walsh’s jurisdiction ruling. If that decision holds on appeal, the case could go before a jury next spring — a rarity in franchise disputes, which are often settled quietly or dragged through years of procedural motions.
From a broader industry standpoint, this one is being watched closely. Dealer-protection laws are designed to balance local franchise rights against the growing control automakers exert over brand identity and retail standards. If The Collection prevails, it could embolden other dealers who resist factory demands for expensive, single-brand showrooms. If Porsche wins, it could reaffirm the automaker’s authority to determine how its products are sold and presented.
Either way, it’s a test of strength between one dealer and one of the most recognized luxury brands on earth — and a reminder that even in a digital age, control of physical inventory still drives the car business.
A Porsche Cars North America spokesperson, Angus Fitton, declined to comment on the litigation, saying the company does not discuss ongoing legal matters.
Attribution: Based on reporting and court filings cited by Law360 .
